Education Under Occupation: Legal Framework — International Humanitarian Law I
- By: Marcos Knoblauch
Aeronautical engineer, master in space and aeronautics from TUM — Germany — and Cranfield University — UK -, and master in human rights from UNLP — Argentina. Member of the Experts Committee, Knowmad Institut, former international accompanier with EAPPI and CPT in Hebron
Abstract
This article is part of the series Education under Occupation, which explores the legal responsibilities of Israel with respect to the Palestinian population living under the military occupation. This article describes the framework of International Humanitarian Law, including a short tour through its history and applicable normative bodies. This study pertains to the situation in Israel and Palestine, specifically to the military occupation of Palestine by Israeli forces.
INTRODUCTION
There are a large number of bilateral agreements and customary norms that regulate the behaviour of combatants and armies on the battlefield, restrict the exercise of certain war practices, and limit the equipment and weapons allowed. However, history shows that these norms are consistently transgressed by armies and their leaders. Modern warfare has not been an exception when it comes to violations of these rules and has provoked increased suffering and horror for civilian populations in every corner of the world. Over time customary rules and bilateral agreements have been rearranged in several multilateral normative bodies in the context of Public International Law. This legal system does not prohibit the use of armed force but limits its use to cases of self-defence. Moreover, it explicitly establishes limits to the harm inflicted on both combatants and civilian populations, seeking to reduce the amount and severity of permanent damage caused by armed force.
The Israeli–Palestinian conflict, sadly, represents a good example of the challenges to duly implementing IHL, and in particular the law of occupation, when one of the parties to the conflict wilfully disregards its basic tenets, such as the temporary nature of occupation and the prohibition of transferring sovereign rights onto the Occupying Power. This should be a lesson for the future: ensuring respect and implementation of IHL is paramount in order to preserve the value of the law and its ability to protect civilians and their rights from the effects of armed conflicts (Jabrain, 2013).
